Bitcoin’s weekend was typical macro haphazard. On Friday, the threat of tariffs against China sliced through risk assets, pushing Bitcoin prices to $110,000, with about $7 billion in crypto positions liquidated as leverage rewound to a thin tape.
From Sunday night into Monday, President Trump’s soft-spoken message on China softened the mood, stabilizing US markets while China ADR rebounded. BTC reversed some of its weakness following a morning surge.
The main question arising from this weekend’s volatility is whether the US spot ETF complex led by BlackRock’s IBIT acted as a shock absorber to prevent Bitcoin prices from falling further into the hole.
A good place to start is with the Creation and Redemption tape. Early last week, the U.S. Spot Bitcoin ETF took a big hit, recording net inflows of about $1.21 billion on October 6 alone, the largest single-day investment in recent months.
This binge took place before the tariff headlines and showed that cash is already lining up and flowing into lap BTC exposure. Even minus the frothing aggregators, mainstream reporting captured the same basic picture. In other words, there was a wave of money flowing into the rapper complex in the days leading up to the macroshock.
Then came the flash. If the ETF is weak, we would expect a flurry of same-day redemptions on Friday. That didn’t happen. According to Farside’s daily table, total US spot BTC ETF flows ended on Friday, October 10th, with outflows of just $4.5 million.
But internally, IBIT raised $74.2 million while most of its peers lost money. This pattern is important because it shows that the ETF market did not act all together on stress days. Some holders sought cashback, but the largest funds issued shares and kept the coins. In sessions defined by forced sellers and shallow spot books, one steady intake valve may be enough to blunt the edges of the cascade.
On Monday, October 13th, the gap widened even further. This table shows the larger cohort outflow, $326.4 million. Once again, IBIT was a net buy, adding $60.4 million. When you compare this with price movements, it becomes clearer that the market did not rise because ETF buyers were priced out across the board.
It stabilized while the single largest product continued to take in coins, while others bled. This combination doesn’t make IBIT a magic floor, but it does explain why the weekend washout didn’t snowball into a sub-$100,000 fast break once the headlines cooled.
To understand these handouts, look back at the beginning of the week. From October 6th to 8th, spot ETFs absorbed massive daily inflows of hundreds of millions of dollars, including record inflows of more than $1.2 billion.
These creations added new BTC to the custodian, giving the fund a cushion of new shares against the downside. Even as volatility increased, investors in these products were in no rush to redeem, and IBIT, the fund with the most active primary market activity, continued to attract demand.
From a structural perspective, ETF redemptions do not trigger immediate selling on the exchange. Authorized participants handle the process by exchanging baskets and hedging exposures through futures and spot markets.
On October 10, there were small net outflows across all funds as AP’s books balanced, likely creating short-term selling pressure, but inflows to IBIT worked in the opposite direction. The result was a neutral street position rather than a unilateral hedge, which helped Bitcoin stabilize after overall market sentiment improved.
There are several takeaways from this.
First, we found that the buyer base was fragmented. Not all ETF holders behave the same way when the screen turns red. On both October 10th and 13th, IBIT recorded net additions and peers booked redemptions. This is consistent with a holder mix that allows for drawdowns within the largest and lowest-fee vehicles, while also allowing faster redemptions of smaller funds.
All that matters when it comes to price is the ultimate impact on the primary market. On the worst days, the magnitude of the cohort’s net outflow was insignificant, partially offset by IBIT intake.
Second, pre-shock inflows change the starting point. A surge in early October meant custodians were already holding newly created shares heading into Friday.
The stock acts like a ballast. The holder must choose redemption to convert the stress into a sale in the primary market. According to the table, many were not. While they did so, IBIT’s work slowed the flow.
Third, derivatives were still driving the story. The $7 billion flush was caused by forced position reductions, not ETF panic.
The ETF tape has added texture: a small net negative on Friday, a larger net negative on Monday, and a sustained backflow in IBIT.
This pattern helps explain why Bitcoin did not break above $100,000 when the macro shock occurred, and why the market had room to rebound after policy trends cooled.
(Tag translation) Bitcoin
